BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fairfield Connecticut

    License required for electrical and plumbing trades. No state license for general contracting, however, must register with the State.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Eastern Connecticut
    Local # 0740
    20 Hartford Rd Suite 18
    Salem, CT 06420

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of New Haven Co
    Local # 0720
    2189 Silas Deane Highway
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hartford Cty Inc
    Local # 0755
    2189 Silas Deane Hwy
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of NW Connecticut
    Local # 0710
    110 Brook St
    Torrington, CT 06790

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Fairfield Connecticut


    Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act

    Angela Cooner Appointed Vice-Chair of Arizona’s Inaugural Board of Legal Specialization Construction Defect Law Advisory Commission

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Practical Advice: Indemnification and Additional Insured Issues Revisited

    “Genuine” Issue of “Material” Fact and Summary Judgments

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Norfolk Southern Agrees to $310M Settlement With Feds Over 2023 Ohio Derailment

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports

    Recent Regulatory Activity

    Colorado Supreme Court Grants the Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes

    A Place to Study Eternity: Building the Giant Magellan Telescope

    A Year-End Review of the Environmental Regulatory Landscape

    Coverage, Bad Faith Upheld In Construction Defect Case

    Is Your Construction Business Feeling the Effects of the Final DBA Rule?

    Fannie Overseer Moves to Rescue Housing With Lower Risk to Lenders

    Recent Statutory Changes Cap Retainage on Applicable Construction Projects

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    Lost Productivity or Inefficiency Claim Can Be Challenging to Prove

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    Florida Courts Say that Developers Are Responsible for Flooding

    New York State Trial Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    A Landlord’s Guide to California’s New Statewide Rent Control Laws

    WSHB Ranks No.10 in Law360’s Best of Law Firms for Women

    Construction Law Alert: Unlicensed Contractors On Federal Projects Entitled To Payment Under The Miller Act

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at a Faster Pace in October

    California Contractor Tests the Bounds of Job Order Contracting

    U.K. Broadens Crackdown on Archaic Property Leasehold System

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    David A. Frenznick Awarded Multiple Accolades in the 2020 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America

    Yes, Indeedy. Competitive Bidding Not Required for School District Lease-Leasebacks

    Hartford Stadium Controversy Still Unresolved

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/23/24) – Construction Backlog Rebounds, Real Estate Sustainability Grows, and Split Incentive Gap Remains Building Decarbonizing Barrier

    Extreme Weather Events Show Why the Construction Supply Chain Needs a Risk-Management Transformation

    State-Fed Fight Heats Up Over Building Private Nuclear Disposal Sites

    Mark Van Wonterghem To Serve as Senior Forensic Consultant in the Sacramento Offices of Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.

    Settlement Agreement? It Ain’t Over ‘Til it’s . . . Final, in Writing, Fully Executed, and Admissible

    What To Do When the Government is Slow to Decide a Claim?

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage Of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Ex-Corps Worker Pleads Guilty to Bribery on Afghan Contract

    Pennsylvania Reconstruction Project Beset by Problems

    CFTC Establishes Climate-Risk Unit, Echoing Other Biden Administration Agency Themes

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    Pending Home Sales in U.S. Increase Less Than Forecast

    Vaccine Mandate Confusion Continues – CMS Vaccine Mandate Restored in Some (But Not All) US States
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    No Conflict in Successive Representation of a Closely-Held Company and Its Insiders Where Insiders Already Possess Company’s Confidential Information

    August 02, 2017 —
    In Beachcomber Management Crystal Cove, LLC v. Superior Court (Salisbury) (No. G054078, filed June 28, 2017; pub. and mod. order July 28, 2017), the Fourth Appellate District granted a writ of mandate vacating a trial court’s order disqualifying defendants’ counsel. In Beachcomber, plaintiffs filed a shareholder derivative action against defendants Beachcomber Management and Douglas Cavanaugh (collectively, “defendants”) alleging defendants abused their position and mismanaged nominal defendant and similarly named Beachcomber at Crystal Cove (“Beachcomber”). Between 2009 and 2011, defendants and Beachcomber had each hired Kohut & Kohut LLP (“Kohut”) to represent them on at least four different occasions. In the underlying action, defendants hired Kohut again to represent them, while Beachcomber hired another law firm to represent it. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Renata L. Hoddinott, David W. Evans and Howard M. Garfield Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Most Expensive Travel Construction Flops

    September 03, 2014 —
    Fox News recently showcased “the world’s biggest and most expensive travel flops,” which includes several construction woes. For instance, the $8.5 billion dollar Harmon Tower in Las Vegas was never completed, and is in the process of being demolished due to construction defects. Also mentioned is the cone-shaped Ryugyong Hotel in North Korea, which had planned to be the tallest hotel on earth with an opening to coincide with the 1989 World Festival of Youth and Students. First, construction delays were blamed on a lack of raw materials, and then the development was passed to an Egyptian company. However, today, over 20 years later, and the hotel has still not been completed. The Berlin Brandenburg Airport made the list. It was supposed to have been completed by 2010, but managers have moved it to 2015, while “insiders hint that the date will be closer to 2019.” Alleged problems include “poor construction and planning—not to mention corruption,” reported Fox News. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    February 01, 2023 —
    I have posted before regarding the intersection between the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) and construction contracting in regard to residential construction projects. A case out of the Eastern District of Virginia District Court further discusses this intersection as it relates to design contracts that also include the procurement and installation of certain design elements post-design. The basic facts of Marcus v Dennis are as follows: In October of 2018, Defendant Marlene Dennis, the owner of Marlene Dennis Design, LLC (“MDD”), operating out of Virginia, entered into a contract to provide design services and the procurement and installation of certain design elements for the Plaintiffs, Gregory and Jamie Marcus, at their Maryland home. The Marcuses agreed to $175 per hour to Dennis with a cap of a total of $100,000.00 for design consultation and furniture selection and procurement. The Marcuses also agreed that they would pay no more than $250,000.00 for furnishings, rugs, artwork, decorative lighting, and accessories. In November 2020, Dennis sent an invoice for $68,000.00 and informed the Plaintiffs that the total contract fees would be more than the $100,000.00 cap. After paying $124,722.41 in design fees, the Plaintiffs received an invoice for $255,5560.72 in January of 2021. Despite the cap of $250,000.00, the Plaintiffs wired $255,000.00 to Dennis while requesting the backup invoices for the material charges. After much effort and a threat of litigation, the Plaintiffs received documents from Dennis showing that Dennis inflated the costs of the materials prior to passing the costs along to the Marcuses. The Plaintiffs’ home was unfurnished and empty as of April 10, 2021, and the Marcuses had to hire and pay another design team over $85,000.00 to finish Dennis’ work. Needless to say, the Marcuses sued both Dennis and her firm for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and for violation of the VCPA. Dennis moved to dismiss the Complaint. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires

    February 16, 2017 —
    In Hensley v. San Diego Gas & Elec. Co., (No. D070259, filed 1/31/17), the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District held that emotional distress damages are available on claims for trespass and nuisance as part of “annoyance and discomfort” damages. In Hensley, plaintiffs sustained fire damage to their home and property during the 2007 California wildfires. The Hensleys were forced to evacuate as the fires advanced. Although their home was not completely destroyed, it sustained significant damage and they were not able to return home permanently for nearly two months. Thereafter, the Hensleys filed suit against San Diego Gas and Electric Company (“SDG&E”) asserting causes of action for trespass and nuisance, among others. Mr. Hensley, who had suffered from Crohn’s disease since 1991, further claimed that as a result of the stress from the fire, he experienced a substantial increase in his symptoms and his treating physician opined that “beyond a measure of reasonable medical certainty... the stress created by the 2007 San Diego fires caused an increase of [Mr. Hensley’s] disease activity, necessitating frequent visits, numerous therapies, and at least two surgeries since the incident.” SDGE moved, in limine, to exclude evidence of Mr. Hensley’s asserted emotional distress damages arguing he was not legally entitled to recover them under theories of trespass and nuisance. The trial court agreed and excluded all evidence of such damages. Reprinted courtesy of Kirsten Lee Price, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Price may be contacted at kprice@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Parks and Degradation: The Mess at Yosemite

    September 09, 2024 —
    A couple of miles past the western entrance to Yosemite National Park, visitors pass from California into a postcard. The road opens to a majestic view of Half Dome, El Capitan and Cathedral Rocks—celebrity peaks if ever there were—which form the towering walls of Yosemite Valley. On the pine-scented floor of John Muir’s mountain mansion, the Merced River flows gently by the side of the road as signs point toward trailheads and tourist destinations. Not far from Curry Village, a cluster of tent cabins and eateries at the eastern end of the road, is a section of employee housing known as the Stables. It was there that Erin Rau found herself wrapped in a sleeping bag one broiling afternoon last summer, wondering whether she was about to die. Rau was a little over a month into a seasonal job selling goods in the village’s general store. Almost as soon as she arrived from Michigan, she recalls, she got the sense this wouldn’t be the carefree, post-college summer gig she’d imagined. In the evenings, she was left alone to manage a bunch of fellow early-twentysomethings making the same sixteenish bucks an hour until the shop closed at 10. At night a family of ringtail possums would crawl down from the rafters to tear into a display of baked goods, a long-standing issue she says her bosses did nothing to resolve, apart from throwing away half-eaten muffins in the morning. Similarly, deer mice kept leaving droppings on the pillows and sheets in the cabin Rau shared with three other women. When one of her roommates complained, she says, management supplied a Ziploc with a couple of mouse traps, a mask, gloves and some hand wipes, leaving the employees to sort out the rest. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura Bliss, Bloomberg

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    November 18, 2011 —

    Vertex Pharmaceuticals is poised to become the holder of Boston’s biggest commercial lease, paying $72.5 million for 1.1 million square feet on Boston’s waterfront. Vertex’s new buildings are still under construction, but the plans have spurred other development in the Fan Pier area, according to the New York Times. The Times quotes Mary A. Burke, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston that the Vertex project gives “a big push” to the “momentum for economic growth.”

    The Fallon Company is building Vertex’s new laboratory and office space. They are separately planning to build a high-rise with 150 luxury condominium units. According to Joseph Fallon, the chief executive and president of the Fallon Company, there is already a waiting list of 50 buyers for the condominiums.

    Across the street from the Vertex site, a group including Morgan Stanley and Boston Global Investors is planning a 23-block mixed use project that would include 1.2 million square feet of retail space. Additionally, the New England Development and the Hanover Group is building a 356-unit apartment building at the adjacent Pier 4.

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal Court Strikes Down 'Persuader' Rule

    November 23, 2016 —
    In a victory for construction industry groups, a federal court has permanently blocked a U.S. Dept. of Labor rule requiring attorneys and other outside groups to disclose publicly that they provide advice to employers on how to comply with federal labor laws. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pam Hunter McFarland, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com

    Exception to Watercraft Exclusion Does Not Apply

    September 24, 2014 —
    The court determined that an additional insured was not entitled to coverage despite an exception to the watercraft exclusion. Holden v. U.S. United Ocean Serv., LLC, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15954 (5th Cir. Aug. 19, 2014). United entered a contract with Buck Kreihs Company, Inc. under which Buck Kreihs would perform ship-repair work for United. Under the contract, Buck Kreihs would indemnify United for all liabilities arising out of the work or services performed by Buck Kreihs for United. The contract further provided that Buck Kreihs was to procure general liability coverage and name United as an additional insured. Buck Kreihs did so under a policy issued by St. Paul. Holden, an employee of Buck Kreihs, was injured while preparing to remove a gangway that led from a dock at Buck Kreihs's facility to a barge owned by United. Holden sued United, which tendered to St. Paul as an additional insured. St. Paul denied coverage under the policy's watercraft exclusion. Holden and United settled. United pursued its third party suit against St. Paul. The district court granted summary judgment to St. Paul. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com